Legal Opinion

Wunderle v. McCaughn

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided June 5, 1929No. 13938PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.

The plaintiff has brought this suit to recover $3,-096.61, being a portion of an additional income tax assessed for the year 1918 and paid under protest. The additional assessment was based upon the rejection by the Commissioner of a deduction claimed, in the amount of $4,553.82 by the taxpayer. An affidavit of defense in the nature of a demurrer admits the facts' set forth in the statement which, summarized, are as follows:

The plaintiff was a candy manufacturer and for many years had in his employ one John F. Carson. Beginning January 1, 1892, the plaintiff agreed…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tucker v. AlexanderSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Union & New Haven Trust Co. v. EatonDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1927
  3. Union Trust Co. of Pittsburgh v. McCaughnDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1927
  4. Warner v. WalshDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1927

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Electric Storage Battery Co. v. McCaughnDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1931
  2. American Security & Trust Co. v. TaitDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1933
  3. Art Metal Const. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
  4. Broderick v. AndersonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1938
  5. Bernard Realty Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1950

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API